Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Conferences, visits and other bilateral or multilateral meetings.

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby jamescfm » Thu Aug 25, 2016 2:08 pm

Serhat Aslan: I would like to address all assembled to bring to the forth a matter that should be of utmost importance to everybody within this hall. It appears that some parties who claim they have come to Indrala to reach a peaceful settlement, do not in fact hold that view. It was brought to my attention by a colleague monitoring the overall situation that a bill has been submitted to the Baltusian Congress, entitled 'Debate over the Baltusian-Kalistani conference'. Unlike previous bills, this one is not sponsored by a fringe or minority party. It is the Patriotic Party of Baltusia who have tabled this bill! It seems to us that the Baltusian side is not committed to a peaceful resolution. On top of considering withdrawing from de-escalation talks, many of the claims made by the Patriotic Party are clearly false. I feel compelled to address these specifically so that Baltusian citizens have access to a narrative other than their government's propoganda.

Not only have the Kalistanis refused our proposal of a DMZ but are now considering moving their own regular troops to the border to replace the paramilitary militias they have there, thus further escalating matters.

Until such a time as the Baltusians present us with a compelling argument why a DMZ would in any way help the situation, we remain vehemently opposed. We repeat that there has been NO movement of Kalistani troops, Baltusia is the only nation to have mobilised its ground force so far. In that case, why should we be forced to agree unreservedly to the Baltusian delegations request? On top of all this, Baltusia has either made false claims to possess WMDs or has obtained them in a clandestine and rogue manner, both of which are utterly deserving of condemnation.

To add fuel to the fire, it now transpires that Mr Benn fleeing to their country was very much pre-planned. The Kalistanis now admit that Mr Benn was in correspondence with them a full year before his court case sentencing - meaning they had plenty of time to consider their options and must have known they would spark a diplomatic incident.

Mr. Benn's first contact with us was once he had already entered Kalistan, at which point we had no choice but to accept him- this is a downright lie.

I apologise for being so frank with my phrasing Comrades but we are infuriated by the complete lack of co-operation from Baltusia. First, let me make it clear that if the nation was to withdraw from peace talks then we believe that to be a signal that they are not interested in a diplomatic solution and wish to fulfil their original desire to invade Kalistan. I am hopeful that this was just a mistake from the Patriotic Party and that we are overestimating the support for this motion within wider Baltusian society. Now, Kalistan has been extremely accomodating thus far, what other nation, when threatened with nuclear apocalypse, wouldn't even mobilise its armed forces? If Baltusia wishes to see a peaceful, diplomatic and productive resolution as soon as possible they must commit to these talks.

Rather than bad mouth us in a way which makes response extremely difficult, could a representative from Baltusia please explain which of the propositions so far are not acceptable to them and which are?
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby matthewleitch » Thu Aug 25, 2016 3:23 pm

Maureen Granger, Justice SecretaryBaltusia's response to the situation:

•Nuclear Disarmment: NO, we shall not disarm our nation of weapons congress in in full support of because of a different nations request. It's our decision to have nuclear weapons and we will keep them.
•DMZ: If you do not wish to create a fair 2km DMZ on either side then I suggest you retreat your paramilitaries from their border training. Should this request be met we shall retreat our forces back and tensions shall deflate.
•Mr Benn situation: I believe we now have no option but to accept that Mr Benn is staying in Kalistan. Please be aware though we fully condemn your and Mr Benns actions of offending the fair, unbiased Baltusian Jusice system.

We hope this is acceptable and if so then let's leave it here and conclude the conference.

Thank you
4042-4190: Baltusian Republican Party (Baltusia)
4190- : Republican Party (Cildania)

“If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.” -Milton Friedman
matthewleitch
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 4:59 pm

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby matthewleitch » Thu Aug 25, 2016 3:26 pm

*Nuclear Disarment: NO, we shall not disarm our nation of nuclear weapons. Congress is in full support of nuclear weapons ad we will not disarm because of a request by yourselves. It's Baltusias decision to have nuclear weapons and we shall keep them.
4042-4190: Baltusian Republican Party (Baltusia)
4190- : Republican Party (Cildania)

“If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.” -Milton Friedman
matthewleitch
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 4:59 pm

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby jamescfm » Thu Aug 25, 2016 6:41 pm

Serhat Aslan: Taking into account all of the discussion and- mainly- disagreement thus far, I am proposing the following on behalf of my party and, if my fellow Kalistani parties find it reasonable, on behalf of Kalistan. The terms are as follows, these are general and the exact details can be agreed on at a later date.

Article I- De-Escalation

Baltusia should demobilise its armed forces, reversing the concentration of military personnel on the border with Kalistan. In exchange, the Kalistani militias will cease conducting drills in areas within twenty kilometres of the Baltusian border two years after this treaty is ratified.

Article II- Settling the Extradition of Karl Benn

Mr. Karl Benn, founder of the Revolutionary Anarcho-Communist Party, shall be allowed to remain in Kalistan for as long as he pleases with no effort to have him returned to Baltusia by the Baltusian government. The conditions under which Baltusia can request extradition are set forth in Article V but these conditions do not apply to Mr. Benn. The only circumstance under which Mr. Benn should return to Baltusia is if he chooses to of his own free will.

Article III- Nuclear Disarmament

Baltusia shall invite inspectors, free from political and national affiliation, to investigate the claims that Baltusia possesses submarines armed with ballistic missiles, able to deliver thermonuclear warheads. Once these inspections have been completed and a conclusion has been determined, Baltusia, Kalistan and at least one other nation shall attend a conference designed to decide what the next steps are and how these should be accomplished. It is recommended that the conference takes place in Indrala, given the Chief Counselor now has a sufficient understanding of the background to this case.

Article IV- Militias in Relation to Baltusia

Given the lack of understanding on the Baltusian side and a need for improved relations, Baltusian delegates are invited to visit the headquarters of Kalistan's two active militias in order to gain a better understanding of their operations, histories and structures. In future, militias wishing to participate in war games within one kilometre of the Baltusian border must notify the Baltusian government prior to doing so. However, the caviats to this deal are that it applies only to paramilitaries- not regular Kalistani forces- and that the Baltusian government are only notified. Specifically, it is not a request and the Baltusian government have no power to decline it.

Article V- The Operation of the Kalistani and Baltusian Governments

Baltusia and Kalistan both agree to remain as far removed from the other's governing of their own nation as is humanly possible. Any communication relating to the other nation must be conducted in an open manner, to eliminate any clandestine dealing, similarly, any request from one government to another should be asked only once and on the Nation Page. The Head of State/Head of Government will then provide an answer to the request and that verdict is final. Where one nation disagrees with the decision made by the other, they shall have no power to challenge it.

Article VI- Next Steps

The President of Baltusia, Baltusian Foreign Affairs Minister and Baltusian Defence Minister shall agree to meet with the President of Kalistan, Kalistani Premier, Kalistani Foreign Affairs Minister and Kalistani Defence Minister here in Indrala (providing our generous hosts agree) to review this legislation exactly ten years after it has been ratified. At this point, extra conditions may be proposed, articles removed or restrictions lifted.

We invite scrutiny of this proposal from all sides.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby Doc » Thu Aug 25, 2016 7:27 pm

Liu Che/Zhuli wrote:Chief Counselor Zhong Lang:

Indeed, Mr. Philander is correct in saying that, by upholding current Kalistani laws, Kalistan is not interfering in Baltusian affairs. What I stated, was that the contact between the Kalistani government and Mr. Benn, a politically controversial figure who had just undergone a trial in Baltusia was poor diplomacy and could be seen as meddling. What should have happened is that the government of Kalistan ignore Mr. Benn's contact, simply allowing him to move to Kalistan. That would, the government of Kalistan would be viewed as less meddlesome from a Baltusian viewpoint. Certainly, if an Indralan individual who had been tried for heinous crimes against the people of Indrala fled to Kalistan to take advantage of their citizenship, the Indralan government would be most upset. So, at the end of the day, we see this issue from both sides and pin the incident on a lack of mutual respect for one another's sovereignty, even if it was merely a momentary lapse in respect. However, this goes to show how much respect is needed between the two countries, making some sort of agreement to avoid these incidents at the government and at the level of political party necessary. Neither Kalistan or Baltusia has the authority to pass laws that can or should be enforced upon any other nation. Both are sovereign entities.

Regardless of no request from the parties, the parties, who are part of the Kalistani government and legislature, should not be engaging in actions that risk escalating diplomatic disputes towards violence. I understand Kalistan is a unique nation and is proud of their culture. That is not a bad thing, oftentimes it is more good than not. However, restraint and prudence should be upheld. Such a situation currently exists regarding Kalistani piracy in the Anantanese Ocean, which, as both Kalistan and Indrala know, led to war. A similar situation could exist regarding Kalistani paramilitaries, at least in cases where Kalistani diplomacy is at stake.

OOC: On the RP Accord, I always think it is a good idea to accept it to better ensure a degree of realism that is actually enforceable. I think Baltusia does not necessarily have to sign on to it (that is up to the players), but seeing as Kalistan and Indrala are both part of it, the precepts of the Accord and the RP Team are going to be held, at least de-facto.


Points Noted. I suppose it is not germane to correct the Mediator, but a couple of things need to be made clear.

1) Mr. Benn's contact was not with the Government of Kalistan strictly speaking. I don't much care what Mr. Benn thought: His contact was with our President, and representatives of the Labour Party. If he claimed asylum, it was the Head of State in person, and not the Government of Kalistan which worked with him on that matter. The SP is involved because the Premier is a Socialist and the SP and LP are political allies within Kalistan. But there was nothing official coming from the Government of Kalistan, as such, granting Mr. Benn asylum on any formal level. That said, our laws allow all those who move to Kalistan to claim citizenship. I suppose this is what Mr. Benn did which would make him ineligible for extradition. If, indeed we had such a policy. But we extradite nobody. This business about which country he belongs to is made moot by him crossing into Kalistani National territory. We will not extradite him, because we cannot. We do have the power to make him personna non grata and kick him out of the country, but that is unlikely now, given the proceedings. So the choices before us is, he stays where he is, or Baltusia violates Kalistani Sovereignty and comes in and gets him themselves. If he makes himself notorious on Kalistani soil and is not a citizen, we will simply deport him. But if he claims citizenship, he is eligible for Kalistani justice.

So it is not the Government of Kalistan which sanctions his continued living in Kalistan. The official position of the Government is that Kalistan does not extradite. All of this other stuff is ancillary to the discussion the Premier of Kalistan sent me to engage in. If Mr. Benn violates our laws, and is not a citizen, we will deport him. If he is a citizen, he will not be returning to Baltusia. We would apologize for Baltusia's feeling upset over the matter, but our laws are the only ones that matter to the Government of Kalistan- No other countries in the world may as well exist when it comes to what goes on within the state of Kalistan.

2) Th RSMoK's actions were seen as escalation, though we can assure this entire conference, at least for RSMoK's part, this was not at all our intention. We operate freely on Kalistani soil and within Kalistani waters. I am sure the Indralan Government will agree with us that the Piracy issue is a rather touchy subject and we have complied with our part of the arrangement to officially condemn piracy within the Anantanese Ocean. We have been a good partner with Indrala in enforcement of non-support of Piracy in the waters, and have explicitly only authorized letters of marque during times of national emergency. We would prefer to separate that issue out from this discussion, if you do not mind.

The Militias are an important auxiliary to Kalistan's Regular forces, and we need to ensure that we are trained to standards higher than those set by most regular militaries, so that we may be effective Partisans. I am sure I do not need to remind our Indralan friends that our Partisans are highly effective- the only way we obtain that is by remaining activated and through training. This requires periodic training exercises, and the SP's militia took the LP's military maneuvers as an opportunity to enhance our training, and to work with our Comrades in the PA. That this was seen as military escalation by the Baltusians, and clearly by the Indralans, is rather troubling to us. I say this because under no circumstances did our activities approach the borders of Baltusia- we remained entirely within the borders of Kalistan, where we should be allowed to operate without the concern of other Governments.

On this matter, the Counselor will be happy to know that the RSMoK's part in the PA's operations is coming to the end of the cycle. We cannot speak for the People's Army, but the RSMoK partisans will be deploying to the rear. Baltusia should not read this as de-escalation any more than they should have read our participation as escalation. It is merely the end of the operation for the RedLegs.

I would hope that we focus going forward not on how to get Mr. Benn back, or whether or not Kalistani Partisans should be allowed to freely operate on Kalistani National soil, but on how to actually resolve the dispute between the Government of Kalistan and the Government of Baltusia.
Primary: Institutionalist Party of Kalistan (IPoK), 5146-

Inactive:
Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK), 2591-
Hizb Al'Sultan حزب السلطان 4543-4551
Parti des Frères Lourenne, 4109-4132
Gaduri Brethrenist Movement (MHdG), 4481-4485
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:29 pm
Location: Kaliburg, Kalistan

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby Doc » Thu Aug 25, 2016 7:42 pm

matthewleitch wrote:Maureen Granger, Justice SecretaryBaltusia's response to the situation:

•Nuclear Disarmment: NO, we shall not disarm our nation of weapons congress in in full support of because of a different nations request. It's our decision to have nuclear weapons and we will keep them.
•DMZ: If you do not wish to create a fair 2km DMZ on either side then I suggest you retreat your paramilitaries from their border training. Should this request be met we shall retreat our forces back and tensions shall deflate.
•Mr Benn situation: I believe we now have no option but to accept that Mr Benn is staying in Kalistan. Please be aware though we fully condemn your and Mr Benns actions of offending the fair, unbiased Baltusian Jusice system.

We hope this is acceptable and if so then let's leave it here and conclude the conference.

Thank you



OOC: the Question is: Where did you all GET the nuclear weapons? Were you walking down the street one day, and saw a crate marked "Nuclear warheads, 100 per" and then just stockpiled them on bombs and missiles? Did you buy them from someone? Do you have an economy capable of producing them yourselves? Where did you get the technology for that? And why hasn't anyone else outside of Baltusia known about this before now? That's the question, the OOC question, which the rest of us are grappling with.
Primary: Institutionalist Party of Kalistan (IPoK), 5146-

Inactive:
Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK), 2591-
Hizb Al'Sultan حزب السلطان 4543-4551
Parti des Frères Lourenne, 4109-4132
Gaduri Brethrenist Movement (MHdG), 4481-4485
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:29 pm
Location: Kaliburg, Kalistan

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby Doc » Thu Aug 25, 2016 7:47 pm

matthewleitch wrote:Maureen Granger, Justice SecretaryBaltusia's response to the situation:

•Nuclear Disarmment: NO, we shall not disarm our nation of weapons congress in in full support of because of a different nations request. It's our decision to have nuclear weapons and we will keep them.
•DMZ: If you do not wish to create a fair 2km DMZ on either side then I suggest you retreat your paramilitaries from their border training. Should this request be met we shall retreat our forces back and tensions shall deflate.
•Mr Benn situation: I believe we now have no option but to accept that Mr Benn is staying in Kalistan. Please be aware though we fully condemn your and Mr Benns actions of offending the fair, unbiased Baltusian Jusice system.

We hope this is acceptable and if so then let's leave it here and conclude the conference.

Thank you


IC: It is not up to the Government of Baltusia to dictate to the Government of Kalistan where we can station our troops. If we want to put them two inches off the line between our two countries, Baltusia has nothing to say about it. The DMZ proposal is not only moot, but it is also insulting. And it violates the long held norm of Sovereignty. You all do not dictate to us where we train our forces. We wouldn't put up with that sort of behavior from an ally. Why would we ever accept that from someone who appears ready to invade our country? As for your forces, you are entitled to put them were you want as well. We would never suggest you create a DMZ for Baltusia. It is as simple as this: If Baltusia does not want a war, they should not start one. Kalistan, for its part has no interest in invading Baltusia, and so we won't. It's just... that easy.
Primary: Institutionalist Party of Kalistan (IPoK), 5146-

Inactive:
Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK), 2591-
Hizb Al'Sultan حزب السلطان 4543-4551
Parti des Frères Lourenne, 4109-4132
Gaduri Brethrenist Movement (MHdG), 4481-4485
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:29 pm
Location: Kaliburg, Kalistan

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby jamescfm » Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:48 am

Serhat Aslan: I am beginning to believe that Mr Philander and I are simply talking to ourselves at this point. We understand that Baltusia has held elections in the last few months but some sort of communication would be appreciated. Even an unconditional rejection of our terms is preferable to complete silence! Kalistan has left itself exposed for years during this crisis and with the greatest of respect for this diplomatic conference, my superiors are becoming increasingly suspicious and irate at Baltusia's actions. Therefore, if I do not receive a response soon then I shall have to inform them that Baltusia has decided it does not want a de-escalation. Please, Comrades, do not let it get to that stage!
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5661
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby Doc » Fri Aug 26, 2016 2:35 pm

Commisar Philander:

As the person we are serving as the Agent of, Premier Carrangus, is no longer in Office, the SP delegation will officially withdraw. We wish the Conference good luck.
Primary: Institutionalist Party of Kalistan (IPoK), 5146-

Inactive:
Socialist Party of Kalistan (SPoK), 2591-
Hizb Al'Sultan حزب السلطان 4543-4551
Parti des Frères Lourenne, 4109-4132
Gaduri Brethrenist Movement (MHdG), 4481-4485
User avatar
Doc
 
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 3:29 pm
Location: Kaliburg, Kalistan

Re: Baltusian-Kali Tian'an Talks

Postby matthewleitch » Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:07 pm

OOC: Sorry I have been offline today, will post something up within the next few hours, i'm not just in total silence. Thaanks
4042-4190: Baltusian Republican Party (Baltusia)
4190- : Republican Party (Cildania)

“If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.” -Milton Friedman
matthewleitch
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 4:59 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Diplomacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests